Max number of recepts per circuit

[colosparker]

Colosparker, you have a few years to go to catch me. :roll: Did you read the excerpt out of the link you provided?

With that said, the document says the inspector can not ask for anything beyond what is adopted formally.

So, show me where a limit is spelled out either in a link from your adopted code or the NEC.

I'll acept it if you can provide that, otherwise you have nothing more than your wishes.


Roger

Roger,
You provided me with the verbage that shows the local electrical authority (Pikes Peak region)has adopted the 2005 NEC.

Show me where in that adopted code it says the number of outlets is unlimited?

 

[peter d]

Show me where in that adopted code it says the number of outlets is unlimited?

First show us where it is limited.

 

[colosparker]

Bob,
Would you dispute the fact that an inspector can approve an installation based on the AHJ's interpretation of the NEC, which is all I am saying.

Interpretation is not the same as making up rules that do not exist.

This discussion started about the max outlets on a residential circuit.

There is no NEC limit and no amount of interpretation can change that.

Of course the AHJ can add new rules through a legal process.

Are you the AHJ or an inspector?

No Bob, I am not the inspector /AHJ. Quote the article and reference in the NEC where it states: "there is no NEC limit" on the number of outlets on the general lighting load branch circuit. Look up the definition interpretation. It has nothing to do with making up rules. It has everything to do with insuring a quality installation IMO.

 

[peter d]

No Bob, I am not the inspector /AHJ. Quote the article and reference in the NEC where it states: "there is no NEC limit" on the number of outlets on the general lighting load branch circuit. Look up the definition interpretation. It has nothing to do with making up rules. It has everything to do with insuring a quality installation IMO.

You really just don't understand what we are trying to say at all.

I will say it plainly:

The NEC is permissive. If no rule exists to forbid an installation, then it's allowed.

We can't quote a code section that says "there is no NEC limit" because there is no such code section. Therefore, the absence of the rule, by default, permits the installation.

Do you understand that now? If you don't, then we are going to continue going in circles as we have been for the past few pages.

 

[colosparker]

Show me where in that adopted code it says the number of outlets is unlimited?

First show us where it is limited.

It's limited by an AHJ excercising their right to interpret the code.

Now you show me where it is "unlimited" Where is the word "unlimited" in the 2005 NEC, that you keep refering to?

BTW- If the NEC is "permissive". What's that stuff about "Mandatory Rules" in Article 90.5(A)?

 

[peter d]

We have been through this before. You are repeating the same questions because you are not getting the answer that you want to hear from any of us.

Go back and read this thread and stop asking the same questions over and over. The answers we provide are not going to change.

You don't understand that the NEC is permissive, and you don't understand interpretation.

If we can't convince you, nobody can.

I am done repeating myself.

 

[iwire]

Quote the article and reference in the NEC where it states: "there is no NEC limit" on the number of outlets on the general lighting load branch circuit.

That is not how the law works.

The police can not arrest someone and say 'find a law that says whatever I arrested you for is legal'

Can I use 1/0 Copper for a 20 amp circuit?

There is no NEC rule that says I can so I guess you would fail me.

It has everything to do with insuring a quality installation IMO.

You job is not quality control it is to enforce the rules adopted in your area as proven by the links you posted.

 

[charlie b]

That is not to say that the contractor cannot dispute the interpretation by the AHJ. The economics are usually such that it makes more sense to comply than it does to take the matter to the governing board.

What you are describing by that statement, unless you choose to withdraw it now, is tyranny. Who was it that first said, "Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely"?

Give me a good argument why you think the number of outlets is unlimited per the NEC on this type of branch circuit in a dwelling.

From reading other posts, I know you are not going to accept this answer. But you asked me a direct question, and I owe you a direct answer. I'll give you two statements:

• It's not "unlimited per the NEC," to use your words, because the NEC does not contain any words that establish a limit.

• If in exercising what you believe to be your duty, and what you believe to be within your authority to interpret the code, you choose to impose a limit, then it is a "limit per Dave," and not a "limit per the NEC."

Whose job is it to protect the consumer from the economic consequences of a poor installation?

It's not the job of an Inspector. It's not the job of the government. It's not your job.

Caveat Emptor!

 

[colosparker]

The NEC is permissive. If no rule exists to forbid an installation, then it's allowed.

We can't quote a code section that says "there is no NEC limit" because there is no such code section. Therefore, the absence of the rule, by default, permits the installation.

Peter,

Where do you get "The NEC is permissive"? Where do you get that stuff about "if no rules exist to forbid an installation, then it's allowed"? There is a rule that exists for general lighting load branch cicuits in a dwelling. IMO the rule is open to interpretation by an AHJ. Even if you read the definition of "Permissive Rules" I don't think there is an intent towards "unlimited", which sounds to me you are trying to suggest.

 

[colosparker]

It's not "unlimited per the NEC," to use your words.

It's not the job of an Inspector. It's not the job of the government. It's not your job.

First off, those are not my words.

Secondly, I never said it was my job.

Thirdly, I disagree with you, and have yet to hear a valid argument.

Touche! :wink:

Dave
Master Electrician/QA inspector/Ditch Digger

BTW. Are you an electrical engineer? Just curious.

 

[peter d]

Where do you get "The NEC is permissive"? Where do you get that stuff about "if no rules exist to forbid an installation, then it's allowed"?

I learned it from being a member of this forum, as well as using common sense and basic logic.

If the NEC were to contain a rule for every single situation that we encounter, it would look like a phone book and be dozens of volumes long. That is impossible, so the NEC set sbasic rules and restrictions in place.

It seems like you have a mental block or you're just plain unwilling to accept that you're wrong about this.

 

[George Stolz]

Dave, present us with an argument that will convince you that the NEC is permissive.

Once you attempt this, you will understand that they speak the truth on the matter.

8)

 

[colosparker]

I learned it from being a member of this forum

It seems like you have a mental block or you're just plain unwilling to accept that you're wrong about this.

Peter,
With all due respect to the vast wealth of experience and unbounding knowledge on this forum, that does not mean it's right.

I don't think I have a mental block. I think I am just trying to make a point on an NEC forum. I accept the fact that nobody agrees with me on this matter. I also realise I base my opinions on my past dealings with electrical inspectors and AHJ's with regards to dwellings. I wish there was just one allmighty code that we could all follow and fight till the death to defend our rights as electricians. I also understand the necessity for an electrical inspector/AHJ to have some discretion on their job/community (not to the point of going beyond the rules of the NEC, unless of course he/she has it in writing from his/her jurisdiction:wink. If the electrical inspector says I want two circuits feeding those four bedrooms. They'll get no argument from me. I will simply pass the added cost on to the consumer and call it good.

Truthfully, there are better fights IMO.

Respectfully,

Dave

Ditch Digger/Wire Stripper/ Romex Runner(retired)

 

[roger]

Dave, my hat's off to you for your tenacity, and it appears as though you will continue to go with your beliefs, so it's probably best if we all move on to another topic.

I will not post anymore in this thread. (I hope, but no promises. :lol: :lol: :lol

Roger

 

[iwire]

I will not post anymore in this thread. (I hope, but no promises. :lol: :lol: :lol

Roger

:lol:

I type that so many times but keeping my word on that is so hard I end up deleting before I post. :lol:

 

[scwirenut]

Iwire,
I work for a public owner as a quality assurance inspector. I don't make rules. I make specifications. The jurisdiction I work in is covered by the state and the state electrical board. They have adopted the 2005 NEC.

Dave

scenario: I come to your town, after proper licensing, wire up a house using as many recepts on a circuit as I wish, you red tag me, I then go to your state electrical board with paperwork from (A) CMP member and IAEC (B) my financial attorney (cause your holding up my XXXX job), after review by your state electrical board you go back home with your hat in one hand and hopefully a code book in the other. I have dealt with inspectors like your kind many times this exact way. YOU ARE NOT THE LAW, you only enforce it

Lets take this one more time step by step to try to end this thing, I believe your biggest confusion is in who the AHJ really is. I completely agree with you when it comes to a AHJ making interpretations, lets break down this example a little. Again I come to your town and a inspector , lets just say the chief electrical inspector personally red tags me on this issue, stating that his personal interpretation is that there is a limit, I as an electrical contractor disagree, so I file a formal appeal, every month or as needed there is a meeting of the electrical board (either local level or at state) (article 80 2002 NEC) at this meeting , much like in a courtroom, the board will listen to both sides, the inspector will present to the board his personal interpretation and any supporting data, then I will do the same, in this specific instance I would present written statements from hundreds of inspectors across the country , (all members of the IAEC), then I would present written statement from CMP members, then the board (the true AHJ) would vote to decide which interpretation is deemed to be prominent. (1 lone inspector with a big head, or hundreds of contractors, inspectors and CMP members.) now let me tell you Dave personally cause I have done this 6 times in my state, your inspector would loose, and be returned with hat in hand. a interpretation is not made by an individual but by the AHJ, (electrical board) I have the right to appeal any interpretation of any code I choose, this process keeps everything fair. no one person can decide. P.S. many times once a formal appeal has been made the inspector while researching supporting data will come to realize through talking to peers he is wrong and will drop the whole thing, it sounds like no one in your town has a spine

 

[JohnE]

Dave,

I haven't been in on this discussion, but please read and understand what everyone here has been telling you is dead on accurate. Nice explanation scwirenut.

 

[George Stolz]

Dave, part of the reason that the reaction is so vehement on this subject is not because of descrimination against inspectors. Inspectors are among the most celebrated members of the forum, because for the most part they are among the most knowledgeable end educated.

The reason it's so heated is because when one inspector decides to give up enforcing the NEC in favor of a personal opinion, the industry suffers. When a person of the authority and responsibility of an inspector gives up on the code, then it's detrimental to the industry as a whole.

Why?

Because if the inspector sets the book aside and starts off alone, it starts a chain reaction.

• Why should installers learn the code when it's easier to simply learn the inspector's peeves?
• What compels the inspector to continue to grow and learn, if any personal whim is 'law'?
• Why should either party learn the code if it's meaningless in a dispute? If rank always determines the winner, the installer knows he is doomed from the start.
• In this environment, the false "codes" eventually grow into wives tales. Word of mouth replaces code. Complete fabrications become rules without any merit.
• Do I need to continue down this depressing road?

This is a code forum. Code is the reason we're here, and we all respect it. It's flawed, it's comical at times, rarely ever clear, but we gather to teach it, learn it, discuss it and share amongst ourselves so that we get smarter. When we're smarter, we can build safer. If the code is compromised, and the channels of communication are broken, then safety is compromised.

That's why the members here in a position to do something, do. We have to retain the integrity of our business, or we're gonna all wind up like Florida.

 

[colosparker]

Dave, part of the reason that the reaction is so vehement on this subject is not because of descrimination against inspectors. Inspectors are among the most celebrated members of the forum, because for the most part they are among the most knowledgeable end educated.

The reason it's so heated is because when one inspector decides to give up enforcing the NEC in favor of a personal opinion, the industry suffers. When a person of the authority and responsibility of an inspector gives up on the code, then it's detrimental to the industry as a whole.

Why?

Because if the inspector sets the book aside and starts off alone, it starts a chain reaction.

• Why should installers learn the code when it's easier to simply learn the inspector's peeves?
• What compels the inspector to continue to grow and learn, if any personal whim is 'law'?
• Why should either party learn the code if it's meaningless in a dispute? If rank always determines the winner, the installer knows he is doomed from the start.
• In this environment, the false "codes" eventually grow into wives tales. Word of mouth replaces code. Complete fabrications become rules without any merit.
• Do I need to continue down this depressing road?

This is a code forum. Code is the reason we're here, and we all respect it. It's flawed, it's comical at times, rarely ever clear, but we gather to teach it, learn it, discuss it and share amongst ourselves so that we get smarter. When we're smarter, we can build safer. If the code is compromised, and the channels of communication are broken, then safety is compromised.

That's why the members here in a position to do something, do. We have to retain the integrity of our business, or we're gonna all wind up like Florida.

Thanks for that expalnation George

 

[colosparker]

Dave,

I haven't been in on this discussion, but please read and understand what everyone here has been telling you is dead on accurate. Nice explanation scwirenut.

What everyone telling me here is not dead on accurate. It's their opinion of an interpretation of Article 220.14(J), which in my opinion distorts the intent of the wording of the code.